3 ms·

I think the one thing that nearly everyone can agree on is that all current welfare systems are quite broken. In Australia, welfare comes in the form of money b

by jfoster 13y ago

I think the one thing that nearly everyone can agree on is that all current welfare systems are quite broken. In Australia, welfare comes in the form of money being deposited into your bank account. Many on welfare claim that it isn't enough to live off properly (probably true) and many not on welfare claim that the system is being abused by people who shouldn't be on it, which is also probably true. I'd like to see a country that experiments with giving people the most basic essentials that they need to get out of welfare. Things like temporary accommodation, basic food, etc. That way there would be no point to abusing it, and no one can claim it isn't sufficient for basic living. I imagine that it would also result in cost savings for the government since they would be buying in bulk rather than distributing cash for those on welfare to spend individually. There's still problems with this approach, but I think it might strike a better balance than current systems.

hamburglar 13y ago
> Many on welfare claim that it isn't enough to live off properly (probably true) and many not on welfare claim that the system is being abused by people who shouldn't be on it, which is also probably true. I think one of the primary differences between the (US) liberal and conservative mentality with respect to welfare is that, while everyone acknowledges that the system isn't going to be perfect, the liberals are incensed by false negatives (the criteria are erroneously set such that someone who truly needs assistance won't get it) whereas the conservatives are incensed by false positives (the criteria are erroneously set such that someone who doesn't deserve assistance and is gaming the system will get it). In other words, both sides acknowledge that the criteria for "deserving" assistance are going to be flawed, they just differ on whose side they'd like to err on. I really think that once you realize this, you can better clarify your own priorities on this issue and come up with a more nuanced position than the usual "you're a monster" / "you're a bleeding heart" blather.
midas007 13y ago
So focusing more on the essentials including: healthcare, housing, food, transportation, education, motivation and a little cash

by jfoster 13y ago

hamburglar 13y ago

> Many on welfare claim that it isn't enough to live off properly (probably true) and many not on welfare claim that the system is being abused by people who shouldn't be on it, which is also probably true. I think one of the primary differences between the (US) liberal and conservative mentality with respect to welfare is that, while everyone acknowledges that the system isn't going to be perfect, the liberals are incensed by false negatives (the criteria are erroneously set such that someone who truly needs assistance won't get it) whereas the conservatives are incensed by false positives (the criteria are erroneously set such that someone who doesn't deserve assistance and is gaming the system will get it). In other words, both sides acknowledge that the criteria for "deserving" assistance are going to be flawed, they just differ on whose side they'd like to err on. I really think that once you realize this, you can better clarify your own priorities on this issue and come up with a more nuanced position than the usual "you're a monster" / "you're a bleeding heart" blather.

midas007 13y ago

So focusing more on the essentials including: healthcare, housing, food, transportation, education, motivation and a little cash